Golden parachute from Citi in the form of big bonus if he gets a high level federal gubmnt job...no questions...Cayman Island bank accounts good for him...payout from NYU...business as usual...run a private equity firm that buys companies and restructures them to make big profits..great job...damn if he doesn't sound alot like that bad guy that tried to take the office from 0
After Mr. Lew repeatedly responded "I do not recall" to key questions about his actions while working at New York University and Citigroup, C -0.15%Mr. Baucus announced Sunday that Mr. Lew had answered the committee's questions "in a thorough and fully transparent manner." Therefore, the committee will vote Tuesday on the nomination.
This is a shame because Mr. Lew is well qualified to explain how the Washington-Wall Street axis of access really operates. And while Mr. Lew's supporters talk about the quantity of paper traded between him and Senate Finance, there are at least two answers that ought to be demanded before Mr. Lew skates to the most powerful job in American finance. They relate to the paychecks he received from his last two employers before returning to government.
We wrote recently about the oddity of New York University paying severance to Mr. Lew in 2006 when he left there voluntarily to work at Citigroup. NYU hasn't explained why it would pay someone for quitting to take a job on Wall Street.
As for the Citi paycheck, the story is how Wall Street has become a get-rich-turnstile for Democratic political operatives. The terms of Mr. Lew's original employment contract with Citi included a bonus guarantee if he left the bank for a "high level position with the United States government or regulatory body."
Most companies include incentives for top employees not to leave, but in this case the contract was written to reward Mr. Lew for treating the bank like a revolving door. Citi says it likes to accommodate employees who do public service or work at nonprofits. But the Lew contract was specific about a senior job in the federal government. There would be no special payout if he left to run the Red Cross or the New York state budget office.
Citi has been an especially nice landing spot for big-shot Democrats. Former White House budget director Peter Orszag is now a Citigroup vice chairman and somehow finds time to write a column for Bloomberg News. And there was former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, who was paid more than $115 million while encouraging the risk-taking that would have destroyed Citi if not for a taxpayer rescue.
Kudlow discuses last night on CNBC
and isn't it convenient how many have forgotten or dismissed the primary role that Lew played in selling the sequestration to congress
There is an old saying that success has a thousand fathers, but failure is an orphan. That gives a lot of insight into the sequestration clause in last year’s debt-ceiling deal, which has not just left Barack Obama’s own Secretary of Defense warning about its “devastating” impact on the military, but also economists warning about the damage it will wreak on the economy. Obama tried to dodge responsibility for the sequestration when Mitt Romney criticized him for it during the final debate, claiming that “[t]he sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed.”
That came as news to the man who literally wrote the book on that deal, Bob Woodward. Woodward teamed up with Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler this morning, and the result is four Pinocchios — thanks to OMB chief Jack Lew’s attempt to shore up Obama’s false claim:
In sum: [Director of the National Economic Council and Obama adviser] Gene Sperling brought up the idea of a sequester, while Jack Lew sold Harry Reid on the idea and then decided to use the Gramm-Hollings-Rudman language (which he knew from his days of working for Tip O’Neill) as a template for sequester. The proposal was so unusual for Republicans that staffers had to work through the night to understand it.
Oddly, Lew in Tampa on Thursday, publicly asserted the opposite: “There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger…. [It] was very much rooted in the Republican congressional insistence that there be an automatic measure at the end.”
This prompted Woodward to go over his notes and interviews once again, to make sure he had gotten it right.
“After reviewing all the interviews and the extensive material I have on this issue, it looks like President Obama told a whopper,” Woodward said. “Based on what Jack Lew said in Florida today, I have asked the White House to correct the record.”
We had been wavering between Three and Four Pinocchios. But in light’s of Lew’s decision to double down on Obama’s claim, we agree it’s a whopper
this is who will have their finger on the printing presses going forward.